LDS things that are false if cafeteria Mo's are right

[_Tobin]

And I do not know if there was a Noah either. There may have been or there may not have been.

From The Book of Mormon: ...

Quoting from the Book of Mormon doesn't prove anything. None of these people knew Noah and they could simply be repeating and/or embellishing stories they heard.

[_DrW]

The great thing about the steel is that Nephi explains exactly how he made the steel (fire and bellows to smelt ore) and that he taught his people how to do this. So, the next time steel shows up, it must be obsidian embedded in wood. How are we supposed to take that seriously?

There's a lot more that goes into smelting crucible steel than a fire and a bellows. To get an idea of how complex this is, get on Netflix and watch an episode of Nova entitled Secrets of the Viking Sword.

Nephi is sadly mistaken if he thinks he can smelt crucible steel by blowing air on some hot coals.

I'm certain that Nephi isn't, and never was, too concerned. After all, Nephi is a purely fictional character.

Interesting, though, that the purveyors of the Book of Mormon fiction apparently knew as much about metallurgy as they knew about shipbuilding, or the toxicity of stones that glow in the dark, or how one navigates an ocean in wooden semi-submersibles with no power and thus no rudder in constant winds and mountainous waves.

[_SteelHead]

Where is god and revelation in all this transmission of earlier legends?

[_Darth J]

From The Book of Mormon: ...

Quoting from the Book of Mormon doesn't prove anything. None of these people knew Noah and they could simply be repeating and/or embellishing stories they heard.

Yeah, in 3 Nephi 22, when the resurrected Jesus is referring to himself in the first person about his dealings with Noah as the God of the Old Testament, he was probably just repeating and/or embellishing stories he had heard.

Let it not be said that defenders of the faith have this uncanny knack for demonstrating specific ignorance of the thing they are defending, though.

[_Darth J]

Where is god and revelation in all this transmission of earlier legends?

I'm also wondering what exactly the value of the Book of Mormon is if it contains nothing but the prejudices, suppositions, superstitions, and uninformed speculation of its ancient authors.

Why exactly would Elohim bother having that translated for the people of our day? And having that translation filtered through the prejudices, suppositions, superstitions, and uninformed speculation of Joseph Smith?

[_moksha]

The OP presented all ill-conceived list of what NOMS believe. Since I consider myself a NOM, I instantly recognized that it did not represent what I believed in. The truth is that when we as individuals determine what values in life hold merit for us, those values are by definition individual and unique. There can be no comprehensive checklist. To do so would be akin to asserting that all homosexuals and Republicans are into bestiality, when in truth, only a fraction of that number are actually seeking animal carnality.

[_DrW]

Quoting from the Book of Mormon doesn't prove anything. None of these people knew Noah and they could simply be repeating and/or embellishing stories they heard.

Tobin,

You haven't been paying attention again, as usual. As was pointed out upthread, the Old Testament provides a genealogy for Noah, as if he were a real person.

Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, pretending to write as Moses, Abraham, and various fictional New World prophets, made up a fictional narrative that was based on the mistaken assumption that the tall tales of the Old Testament represented world history. Now the LDS Church is stuck with this stuff as canonized scripture. Sort of like the Scientology Space Opera, but longer, more boring, and in faux KJ English.

Your patching together what you apparently believe is a plausible means of explaining some of the contradictions in the narrative by talking about the various fictional characters as if they were real people is beyond amusing.

Of course, since you have me on ignore, you may never see this, but it bears repeating from time to time so that the lurkers who drop in on occasion don't get the idea that anyone here actually takes you seriously.

[_SteelHead]

Yeah, in 3 Nephi 22, when the resurrected Jesus is referring to himself in the first person about his dealings with Noah as the God of the Old Testament, he was probably just repeating and/or embellishing stories he had heard.

Let it not be said that defenders of the faith have this uncanny knack for demonstrating specific ignorance of the thing they are defending, though.

FTW. Once again DarthJ has won "teh interwebz".

This is a logical flaw of the same magnitude as disappearing lamanites despite angel Moroni, fresh from the presence of god, identifying the american Indians as the literal descendants of father Abraham.

When god in his omniscience and his angels can't get things right..... Well there is no hope for we mere mortals.

[_Brackite]

Yeah, in 3 Nephi 22, when the resurrected Jesus is referring to himself in the first person about his dealings with Noah as the God of the Old Testament, he was probably just repeating and/or embellishing stories he had heard.

Let it not be said that defenders of the faith have this uncanny knack for demonstrating specific ignorance of the thing they are defending, though.

LOL!

[_nc47]

I don't know the proof. I didn't take real analysis (or whatever class it's taught in).

I see. But you're asserting it anyway.

If you can't demonstrate the logical consistency of anything, then why do you care if LDS teachings are inconsistent with science?

I don't know the proof but I know what it is.